They’re even wearing a 100 gecs - Frog on the Floor shirt in their Rainbow Frogs talk. (better view here)

I would say the bare minimum is supporting their game client on Linux. They don’t need to be supporting project developments like Valve, but at least giving a token gesture that they recognize and are doing their part for this issue would be a nice gesture to the gamers who feel that anti-DRM/game preservation and a future with Linux are very correlated - regardless of Linux’s present-day state. By not having their game client available on Linux they have actively hindered the growth of Linux, and only through Valve’s support are we getting closer to that future (as well as the Linux community who have eventually made their own GOG clients due to the lack of official support).

They have been making a willful choice to not use any of their money to support Linux, which has been clear for many years by the GOG users overwhelmingly asking for Linux support to no avail. Their Linux game installers are the bare minimum of using someone else’s setup installer. I’m saying that if I’m going to be giving money to somebody, I’d rather give it to a company that’s doing more with it and seems to have a stronger belief in actually making the effort to achieve this future instead of waiting for it to happen by someone else’s hand.

I wish they’d align more at least on the Linux issue. What’s the use of preserving games for an OS that’s not going to last? It seems antithetical to their goals. Meanwhile, Wine and the rest of the Linux emulation components are also doing real work for preserving games by just making their original releases continue to work on modern operating systems through translation layers. My guess is GOG is waiting for gaming on Linux to be “worth it” before devoting their time and effort into it, which is basically just being a fair-weather friend and not actually helping.

Stuff like this is the main reason why I only buy from Steam if I can help it. GOG has a noble anti-DRM goal, but Valve is doing a lot more stuff that matters. Besides, I count Steam’s apathy towards their own easily-bypassed DRM as effectively DRM-free at this point, and as far as I understand Steam’s DRM is also voluntary for game devs to use.

Dear lord the LTT Linus is a nightmare to watch. I did enjoy listening to Torvalds’ answers to the questions they asked, but had to constantly skip past the other one getting in the way. I know Torvalds’ key attribute is not being “nice”, but he’s clearly got his heart in the right place.

It could be both, but often I see downvotes used strongly when information is actually incorrect or misleading, regardless of whether the person is trying to be pleasant or not. I guess that upvotes on a post like this could be mistaken for agreement. If the OP was instead phrased as a question it probably wouldn’t be downvoted.

I think it’s more of a result of OP conflating this with an “average” Debian experience. Who knows if Kali (downstream) or the user made a frankendebian, and who knows what they’ve done to their install before this log. Using Kali for an improper reason doesn’t give a lot of bonus points in our trust that this is not user-induced.

The lifetime prices actually don’t seem that bad depending on your usecase (mine is solely redundant backups). Compared against Backblaze B2 for backup or a VPS service you’d come out ahead after a few years. I pay $50 for a 2TB VPS yearly, which I also use as a public IP reverse proxy/etc. Of course, “lifetime” means “for the life of the service” and all that, as well storage may not scale forever into the future, and companies usually tend to mess around with older lifetime deals after 5-10 years, but on paper it’s slightly tempting. Anyone have any tiebreakers?

Edit: I think I’d be kneecapped trying to find a cheap enough VPS to switch to that still fits my bandwidth needs. It would still be like minimum $20/year, in which case the price difference would be resolving at ~$30/year, which isn’t really fast enough to not consider this a risk or push.

As far as I’m aware this is true (same with a lot of desktop linux distros), but I’m more interested in freeing myself from Android at the moment. I’m sure we can get there eventually w/r/t security, but it takes time, and we’ll never get there if we don’t start moving.

To me it reads like Graphene is saying /e/ is “actively attacking” them as a puppet of the government of France. How do you reconcile them both being perfectly good when either one is engaging in this behavior, or one is lying about it? It’s okay to support both projects overall and not agree with every action they take, but that doesn’t mean you have to turn a blind eye to accountability when they are making bad choices (to put it lightly). In any other project, criticism would lead to positive changes and correction of bad behavior. Because Graphene doesn’t work like that, I think it’s important to understand their history so that everyone is more informed when they make serious accusations about other innocent projects like this.

It mainly makes me pine for linux phones. I think Graphene is the best we have at the moment in the mobile space, but that’s far more of a testament to our lack of options than how valuable Graphene is. I have no doubts that we’ll eventually kick Graphene to the curb when it stops being useful, so I’m not overly concerned with its future. Worst-case, I think many of us would be just fine on any other AOSP rom for a few extra years until linux phones can come save us all.

This is actually a really relevant note, because all of us are the “wolf-watchers” in that sense. We’re all trying to keep track of accountability on stuff like this and use what little power we have to protest and counteract government overreach and abuse. When hyperbole and gaslighting are used by those “crying wolf” it makes our jobs that much more difficult. Even after reading through the HN thread I still am not sure if the threat is real or imagined. There are a couple paranoid leaps in logic asserted as fact, and that makes it impossible to know which other “facts” are actually just opinions. By all means, they should GTFO of France if they feel they might be threatened, but turning around and saying they’re being imminently attacked by France makes it so much harder to understand what’s actually happening.

I did skim through some similar discussion on the HN link, which you can read here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45999024

I honestly don’t know or care enough to figure out how much exaggeration is taking place, but it seems like there’s at least a possibility that this is a nothingburger from a powerless journalist that’s being extrapolated like crazy. There might be a definite answer in that thread but I don’t have the time to evaluate all angles of this incident right now.

Graphene (more specifically its founder) is always in a vicious cycle of claiming that everyone asking for proof of Graphene being “under attack” is in itself making an “attack”. You can consider yourself Graphene’s enemy for life for your transgression.

Watching these youtube links makes you an attacker also, so be careful: https://youtu.be/Dx7CZ-2Bajg https://youtu.be/4To-F6W1NT0

I don’t want to write up a whole paper at the moment but I’ll note that you really shouldn’t be trusting any cloud providers with your data, because you should always be fully encrypting your data before they get their hands on it. Plasma Vaults (if you use KDE) are one way to do this, or you can use something like Cryptomator, gocryptfs, etc. Basically how it works is that you store files encrypted in one directory (/home/me/Encrypted), then transparently unencrypt that data to another mountpoint for your regular usage (/home/me/Unencrypted). Modifications in the Unencrypted directory will automatically affect the Encrypted directory through the use of magic. The cloud provider will only sync the Encrypted directory, and without the key they know nearly nothing about what your data is.

Given this sort of workflow, you can store your data anywhere, as long as you have a nice (open-source) way of syncing to that provider that can’t introduce any further vulnerability.

Semi-related for people whose distros don’t package deno, I installed deno in a distrobox and exported it with distrobox-export and yt-dlp picked it up just fine from my $PATH. Before I did so, running yt-dlp gave the following error:

WARNING: [youtube] No supported JavaScript runtime could be found. YouTube extraction without a JS runtime has been deprecated, and some formats may be missing. See  https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/wiki/EJS  for details on installing one. To silence this warning, you can use  --extractor-args "youtube:player_client=default"  

The price of the eco-friendly detergent they’re advertising is way too high to justify (17x the cost of my store brand). It’s cool to know that a more powerful powder is possible, though.

I definitely agree that secure communication is not political, but my concern is more about that person’s ability to break the security or implement backdoors. I’m okay with simplex as a concept (warts and all), but I’d need a different client or at least someone else packaging the software so that they can check the commits before building. For most other people’s beliefs I’m not overly concerned with the maintainers trying to maliciously impose them, but people in the maga crowd have completely lost touch with reality, and giving someone like that the sole power to make a git commit and push a client update that can get people killed makes me too nervous long-term. We’ve seen them literally kill each other for not being hateful enough, and this is a problem that’s only getting worse.

Trump/maga is pro-big government, regardless of what they pretend they are, and more importantly they’re pro-making my friends dead. When the topic is sensitive communications that could lead to such a scenario, that association is very hard to ignore.

Yep, I forgot it’s not a company. The point stands though; someone has to pay for the servers and administration, and if they run out of money or the foundation falls apart, then the problem happens in the same way. I don’t know much about Wikipedia’s structure, but I would guess it’s a similar situation in terms of needing money to stay running and also being able to be salvaged by the community if it does go down.